Let's Talk About the Refereeing

[Nightfall 871]

YOU may want to watch the replay again. I just saw it on the NHL replay of the game that`s going on now on NHL Network and if you watch closely, first Belanger`s stick hits Franzen in the face, then Doan pushes him into the boards face first for a 1-2 punch. Watch the change of direction of Franzen from being pushed by Doan. I`d be pissed too.

I guess I don't see it the way you do. Even the announcers say it was a clean hit, and I have to agree with them as well. The stick doesn't even appear to get up in the face of Franzen. Anyone have a slower replay we can look at?

I like Babcocks' take on the hit.

Red Wings coach Mike Babcock did not feel it was a malicious hit.

“Franzen toe-picked and Doan kind of bumped him,’’ Babcock said. “In my opinion, no penalty.’’

Either way, I am siding with the call on the ice on this play in specific. Now the Helm boarding call was weak, and I haven't even watched the 3rd period yet.

Edited April 17, 2011 by Nightfall

[Tman77 40]

I guess I don't see it the way you do. Even the announcers say it was a clean hit, and I have to agree with them as well. The stick doesn't even appear to get up in the face of Franzen. Anyone have a slower replay we can look at?

I like Babcocks' take on the hit.

Either way, I am siding with the call on the ice on this play in specific. Now the Helm boarding call was weak, and I haven't even watched the 3rd period yet.

1) You need to watch it in HD on a big screen tv like I did with the NBC feed on NHL Network, not this small online crappy quality cbc feed. 2) Babcock is on the bench and isn`t in position to see how it is like we we are able to sitting at our tv`s with the replays in slo-mo.

Here is the NBC feed. Not as good as a tv but better angles and quality then the cbc feed. You see the stick hit him in the face as well with this one. Make sure to go to youtube, click 720hd, and go full screen (taking it that you have a good enough monitor for it).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yVlunmF9bVc

Edited April 17, 2011 by Tman77

[hooon 1,089]

I guess I don't see it the way you do. Even the announcers say it was a clean hit, and I have to agree with them as well. The stick doesn't even appear to get up in the face of Franzen. Anyone have a slower replay we can look at?

I like Babcocks' take on the hit.

Either way, I am siding with the call on the ice on this play in specific. Now the Helm boarding call was weak, and I haven't even watched the 3rd period yet.

LMAO at judging a call based on the commentary of the people at NBC.

I agree that its not a Penalty on Doan, but the other guy's stick catches Mule in the face (after he's on the ice). Should be a 4 min penalty, but honestly I didn't see that even after watching the replay a few times. I only noticed it after Mule mentioned it in the postgame and when I really searched for it, so I don't expect the refs to see that.

Be curious as to what you think of that third period though. And what about the boarding call on Helm?

[pjgj13 30]

You might want to watch the replay again. Franzen already lost his balance. Doan barely touched him. I was watching the game with a few other hockey fans and even they were ok with the non call, and yes, they were Detroit fans as well.

As for the other calls in the 3rd period, I am going to have a look at the game in its entirety today. I had to leave at the start of the 3rd period because of a hockey tournament I was playing in.

I was just saying that Helm's hit was nowhere near a vicious hit. Remember when Abbie got a boarding call (against the Hawks?) when the player was facing him and hit him CLEANLY?? It just seems that Franzen never draws a penalty that could change the game. How many times has he taken a hit to the head (or ducked at the last second to avoid one).

It may have been a clean hit but if it was the other way around, what do you think would happen (not suggesting conspiracies!!)?? What if Bert hit Doan the same way?? How many high sticks has Mule taken in just the last few weeks and NONE were called (even though blood was dripping down his face)??

[henrik40 76]

I have never been more frustrated after watching a victory. We had the Coyotes down and out and had our foot on their throats. Completely outplaying them but I swear, these chincy calls to allow teams back into games might have given them something to build off of and might allow them back in the series. The boarding call on Helm was one of the worst I've ever seen. He laid his shoulder right into Jovo's shoulder and Jovo might as well have grabbed Helm around the neck the way he grabbed his chin. Unbelievable. 7 straight playoff games facing a 5 on 3 (I could be wrong). It's so aggravating.

[Tman77 40]

As for Doan`s hit on Franzen not being Boarding, I disagree. Check the NHL ruling on boarding:

Rule 41 - Boarding

41.1 Boarding – A boarding penalty shall be imposed on any player or goalkeeper who checks an opponent in such a manner that causes the opponent to be thrown violently in the boards. The severity of the penalty, based upon the degree of violence of the impact with the boards, shall be at the discretion of the Referee.

There is an enormous amount of judgment involved in the application of this rule by the Referees. The onus is on the player applying the check to ensure his opponent is not in a vulnerable position and if so, he must avoid the contact. However, there is also a responsibility on the player with the puck to avoid placing himself in a dangerous and vulnerable position. This balance must be considered by the Referees when applying this rule.

Any unnecessary contact with a player playing the puck on an obvious “icing” or “off-side” play which results in that player being knocked into the boards is “boarding” and must be penalized as such. In other instances where there is no contact with the boards, it should be treated as “charging.”

41.2 Minor Penalty – The Referee, at his discretion, may assess a minor penalty, based on the degree of violence of the impact with the boards, to a player guilty of boarding an opponent.

41.3 Major Penalty – The Referee, at his discretion, may assess a major penalty, based on the degree of violence of the impact with the boards, to a player guilty of boarding an opponent (see 41.5).

41.4 Match Penalty – The Referee, at his discretion, may assess a match penalty if, in his judgment, the player attempted to or deliberately injured his opponent by boarding.

41.5 Game Misconduct Penalty - When a major penalty is imposed under this rule for a foul resulting in an injury to the face or head of an opponent, a game misconduct shall be imposed.

41.6 Fines and Suspensions - Any player who incurs a total of two (2) game misconducts under Rule 41 and/or Rule 43, in either Regular season or Play-offs, shall be suspended automatically for the next game of his team. For each subsequent game misconduct penalty the automatic suspension shall be increased by one game.

When a major penalty is imposed under this rule, an automatic fine of one hundred dollars ($100) shall be imposed.

If deemed appropriate, supplementary discipline can be applied by the Commissioner at his discretion (refer to Rule 28).

Edited April 17, 2011 by Tman77

[Nightfall 871]

You failed to underline the second most important line.

"There is an enormous amount of judgment involved in the application of this rule by the Referees."

[Nightfall 871]

1) You need to watch it in HD on a big screen tv like I did with the NBC feed on NHL Network, not this small online crappy quality cbc feed. 2) Babcock is on the bench and isn`t in position to see how it is like we we are able to sitting at our tv`s with the replays in slo-mo.

Here is the NBC feed. Not as good as a tv but better angles and quality then the cbc feed. You see the stick hit him in the face as well with this one. Make sure to go to youtube, click 720hd, and go full screen (taking it that you have a good enough monitor for it).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yVlunmF9bVc

The slow motion in front of Franzen would be great to see because the stick may not have hit him in the face. I really can't tell 100%.

I think you just answered your own question. You have to watch it in HD and in slow motion to even see the penalty. If Babcock saw this, then maybe his tune would have changed. I am not surprised that the refs didn't call anything on it.

[Nightfall 871]

I was just saying that Helm's hit was nowhere near a vicious hit. Remember when Abbie got a boarding call (against the Hawks?) when the player was facing him and hit him CLEANLY?? It just seems that Franzen never draws a penalty that could change the game. How many times has he taken a hit to the head (or ducked at the last second to avoid one).

It may have been a clean hit but if it was the other way around, what do you think would happen (not suggesting conspiracies!!)?? What if Bert hit Doan the same way?? How many high sticks has Mule taken in just the last few weeks and NONE were called (even though blood was dripping down his face)??

You are throwing a lot of "what if" situations out there. The simple fact of the matter is we won't know how the refs are going to call something until the situation presents itself. Then, the refs in charge of the game will need to process the situation and make the appropriate calls or don't call anything.

The sooner that people here realize that human perception is the key to how a game is called, the better off they will be. I don't get bent out of shape when it comes to reffing anymore because I have wore the stripes and reffed games. I think more people here need to do the same thing. Its easy to levy criticism. Its hard to walk (or in this case, skate) in the shoes of someone else.

[PrairieDawg 52]

I don't understand how they are saying he was already going to fall into the boards. Cause he was fine if he wasn't touched, he'd drop down to a knee and turn around. However, he was pushed into the boards because hes going North and then goes West how else would he have done that?

[Tman77 40]

You failed to underline the second most important line.

"There is an enormous amount of judgment involved in the application of this rule by the Referees."

Or you mean the sentence right after it? "The onus is on the player applying the check to ensure his opponent is not in a vulnerable position and if so, he must avoid the contact."

The slow motion in front of Franzen would be great to see because the stick may not have hit him in the face. I really can't tell 100%.

I think you just answered your own question. You have to watch it in HD and in slow motion to even see the penalty. If Babcock saw this, then maybe his tune would have changed. I am not surprised that the refs didn't call anything on it.

I never had a question...

I was just replying initially to where you stated Doan barely touched him. The stick incident was just another part of the whole. I agree with that they could have missed the high stick.

Edited April 17, 2011 by Tman77

[Tman77 40]

I don't understand how they are saying he was already going to fall into the boards. Cause he was fine if he wasn't touched, he'd drop down to a knee and turn around. However, he was pushed into the boards because hes going North and then goes West how else would he have done that?

Bingo. Franzen was going towards the end boards straight then was pushed left by Doan.

[soonboomer 31]

You are throwing a lot of "what if" situations out there. The simple fact of the matter is we won't know how the refs are going to call something until the situation presents itself. Then, the refs in charge of the game will need to process the situation and make the appropriate calls or don't call anything.

The sooner that people here realize that human perception is the key to how a game is called, the better off they will be. I don't get bent out of shape when it comes to reffing anymore because I have wore the stripes and reffed games. I think more people here need to do the same thing. Its easy to levy criticism. Its hard to walk (or in this case, skate) in the shoes of someone else.

[Hossa4Life 4]

i wonder if nightfall still is a ref...

Edited April 18, 2011 by Hossa4Life

[Nightfall 871]

i wonder if nightfall still is a ref...

Yup, I am. Just got done reffing a couple adult league games less than 2 hours ago.

[wings1110 184]

i dont think the hit on franzen was boarding, or the hit on jovo. boarding should be erased from the rulebook, its the player who gets hits fault.

[Buppy 1,720]

You are throwing a lot of "what if" situations out there. The simple fact of the matter is we won't know how the refs are going to call something until the situation presents itself. Then, the refs in charge of the game will need to process the situation and make the appropriate calls or don't call anything.

The sooner that people here realize that human perception is the key to how a game is called, the better off they will be. I don't get bent out of shape when it comes to reffing anymore because I have wore the stripes and reffed games. I think more people here need to do the same thing. Its easy to levy criticism. Its hard to walk (or in this case, skate) in the shoes of someone else.

Another simple fact is that the ref's perception does not determine if a call was right or wrong, as you seem to suggest. In some cases, the ref has some discretion but that's not the same thing.

Making a 'correct' call based on faulty perception is still a mistake by the ref. People need to complain about mistakes. Otherwise, there's no incentive for improvement.

[Nightfall 871]

Or you mean the sentence right after it? "The onus is on the player applying the check to ensure his opponent is not in a vulnerable position and if so, he must avoid the contact."

I was just replying initially to where you stated Doan barely touched him. The stick incident was just another part of the whole. I agree with that they could have missed the high stick.

No, the sentence I quoted was the most important of everything.

As for Doan, I had to watch the play in slow motion to even get the hint that Doan was pushing Franzen. Watching in real time, I still think that Doan barely initiated contact. As I keep saying though, its all about perception when you watch the play. If you have your Red Wings glasses on, I think you could more easily come to a conclusion that Franzen was annihilated by Doan. If you have the slightest ability to see it from a refs perspective, you could see that it may be incidental contact.

[Nightfall 871]

Another simple fact is that the ref's perception does not determine if a call was right or wrong, as you seem to suggest. In some cases, the ref has some discretion but that's not the same thing.

Making a 'correct' call based on faulty perception is still a mistake by the ref. People need to complain about mistakes. Otherwise, there's no incentive for improvement.

Yet, in the case of the non-call on Franzen, there is a wide variety of people who can't come to a conclusion on if a call should be made. Wings fans insist there was a missed call, yet you have many people who say there was no call. So who is right? Who makes that distinction? How is that distinction made? Is it made with or without the aid of instant replay?

I do have to agree with you. The refs should be striving for perfection. The fans just have to realize that perfection will never be achieved, especially at the highest level of hockey. The most recognized refs like McCreary and Frasier are a rare breed. The refs at this level go up and down all the time. If they can't cut it, they go back down to the AHL level. That should show that things are being done by the league to get the best refs they can.

[Hockeytown_Ryan 119]

Even Babcock said it should not of been a penalty. He himself said "He toepicked and Doan hit him....No Penalty"

[wings1110 184]

franzen got himself in that position, its hockey s*** happens

[Tman77 40]

No, the sentence I quoted was the most important of everything.

As for Doan, I had to watch the play in slow motion to even get the hint that Doan was pushing Franzen. Watching in real time, I still think that Doan barely initiated contact. As I keep saying though, its all about perception when you watch the play. If you have your Red Wings glasses on, I think you could more easily come to a conclusion that Franzen was annihilated by Doan. If you have the slightest ability to see it from a refs perspective, you could see that it may be incidental contact.

You state that people have their "Red Wing glasses on". I counter it with you have your "Ref glasses" on. It`s fine to get the other sides (read: referees in this case) viewpoint. Always good to have as much info to process to hopefully get the correct end result. In this case of Franzen, he clearly skates in one direction, then goes sideways into the boards from the push from Doan. I didn`t need a replay to see that much although you apparently did. Disregarding everything else, the minimum you need to look at is Franzen`s face going smash into the boards from Doan`s push. There is no way you can miss it and it fulfills the boarding decription in said rule. THAT is more important to me. What you quote is the release of responsibility of missing the call that should have been made but could be used for the high sticking incident which was not as clear except from certain angles.

Edited April 18, 2011 by Tman77

[Hockeytown_Ryan 119]

You state that people have their "Red Wing glasses on". I counter it with you have your "Ref glasses" on. It`s fine to get the other sides (read: referees in this case) viewpoint. Always good to have as much info to process to hopefully get the correct end result. In this case of Franzen, he clearly skates in one direction, then goes sideways into the boards from the push from Doan. I didn`t need a replay to see that much although you apparently did. Disregarding everything else, the minimum you need to look at is Franzen`s face going smash into the boards from Doan`s push. There is no way you can miss it and it fulfills the boarding decription in said rule. THAT is more important to me. What you quote is the release of responsibility of missing the call that should have been made but could be used for the high sticking incident which was not as clear except from certain angles.

When you watch it .....did you watch Franzen as HE was skating? He clearly ruts his skate and gets bumped. it is not controllable where he goes from that point.

you cannot call a infraction based on a falling player getting bumped. the correct call was made in that respect....

the Helm call..... UGH!!!!! I think the Ref needed glasses on that one!

I guess Babcock had his "Hockey glasses" on.... saw it for what it was!

Edited April 18, 2011 by Hockeytown_Ryan

[Tman77 40]

When you watch it .....did you watch Franzen as HE was skating? He clearly ruts his skate and gets bumped. it is not controllable where he goes from that point.

you cannot call a infraction based on a falling player getting bumped. the correct call was made in that respect....

the Helm call..... UGH!!!!! I think the Ref needed glasses on that one!

"Rut" or not, he gets slammed into the boards face first sideways. The rule states that the player checking should hold up on the check. As for Helm, agreed. In any case, we`ve all said our piece and know where we stand. Time for a beer. Can`t wait for tomorrows game and hopefully our good fortune continues and the Wings win. :beerbuddy:

Edited April 18, 2011 by Tman77

[Nightfall 871]

You state that people have their "Red Wing glasses on". I counter it with you have your "Ref glasses" on. It`s fine to get the other sides (read: referees in this case) viewpoint. Always good to have as much info to process to hopefully get the correct end result. In this case of Franzen, he clearly skates in one direction, then goes sideways into the boards from the push from Doan. I didn`t need a replay to see that much although you apparently did. Disregarding everything else, the minimum you need to look at is Franzen`s face going smash into the boards from Doan`s push. There is no way you can miss it and it fulfills the boarding decription in said rule. THAT is more important to me. What you quote is the release of responsibility of missing the call that should have been made but could be used for the high sticking incident which was not as clear except from certain angles.

I don't state that people have their red wings glasses on. I stated "if you have your red wings glasses on" but I digress. It was aimed at you in specific. In regards to me, I have both sets of glasses on. I am a die hard Wings fan, but at the same time, I do have glasses on in regards to the refs perspective of things.

Its amazing how some people see a situation develop, and they are up in arms about it. Then you have others who say things transpired 100% differently. As you said though, its all said and done. I am looking forward to Game 3!